CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW
...Child Support
......Current C/S Guidelines
.........Rebutting Presumptive Amount
............Wealthy Payor
 16 Cards On This Topic:
  • Presumptive amount may be rebutted by showing that paying parent has extraordinarily high income and presumed support would exceed needs of child.
  • Child support may improve standard of living of custodial household to improve lives of children.
  • Trial ct. improperly placed the burden of justifying a guideline award on Mother, and improperly relied on her historical expenses, rather than on F's disposable income and lifestyle, to determine C's reasonable needs.
  • Trial court need not rubber stamp mother's request in exceptionally high earner income case and defer to guideline c/s amount.
  • Payor claiming high income exception to guideline has burden of showing that application of the formula would be unjust or inappropriate and a lower award would be consistent with Cs’ best interests.
  • Court did not abuse its discretion in setting c/s and s/s that exceeded H's monthly income where his extensive property holdings and special circumstances allowed deviation from guidelines.
  • Trial ct. must first determine guideline child support based on exceptionally high earning payor's actual income before determining whether a downward departure is required.
  • Burden is on payor to establish what constitutes extraordinarily high income; $350,000 income cap unsubstantiated— amount varies by geographical area.
  • Great income discrepancies exist within the class of persons whose incomes are extraordinarily high and this discrepancy can affect the child’s needs.
  • Trial court may not order a portion of child support in high income cases set aside in trust for child's special needs and college absent extraordinary factual showing.
  • Drastic deviation from guideline amount in high income case would be an abuse of discretion.
  • Reversible error for court not to state reasons in writing or on record per Fam. Code §4056 when making support award which differs from guideline.
  • Support award which did not comport with F's extraordinarily high income and standard of living was abuse of discretion.
  • W properly awarded portion of H's future bonuses as additional child support.
  • Child should share in wealthy parent's standard of living.
  • Other issues relating to high income child support payors.


    •